POTUS to UK: 2.2

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,933
1,910
113
So you believe that hateful speech should be allowed, regardless of consequences?

Is it hateful speech that the Left tries to supress? Not in my opinion. They try to supress all sorts of speech that they disagree witth, whether hateful or not. Brexiteers campaigning to leave the EU; people campaigning to cut immigration and implement immigration controls once outside the EU; people who are opposed to gay marriage. These are all people whose legitimate views are often being supressed by mobs of intolerant Lefties. This is fascism.

Soooo... no right leaning person has ever attacked a left leaning person? Ever killed them?
It seems to me that the Left are the ones conducting most of the suppression and violence and intimidation against opposing groups. It isn't the Right who are suppressing and "no-platforming" opposing views in colleges and universities, where free speech, dissenting views and debate between people with opposing views should be encouraged. All these perpetrators are the Left. It's fascism. No free speech. No opposing views. The banning of people speaking with opposing views to the Left. Fascism.

Consequence of a Democracy, sometimes people don't like the decision and try to overturn it. Notice it has NOT been revisited? Also, Roe v. Wade.
I don't remember a systematic campaign in the United States to try and overturn the election of Obama. I doubt there would have been a systematic campaign in the UK to try and overturn a Remain win in the referendum. Again, it's the Left trying to overturn democracy when the people had the audacity to go for their opponents. It's fascism. Perpetrated by the Left.

Nazi Germany was Catholic so long as the Church went along with them. Not all left leaning people are anti-Christian, but many ARE Christian and follow the true teachings of Christ, which the right sometimes has serious issues with.
Fascist states are generally anti-religion.

Also - right leaning people so anti-Islamic it refuses to acknowledge not all of Islam is bad.
I think the Right generally has a more commonsense attitude towards Islam than the Left does. The Right recognises that, according to polls conducted in the UK, a significant number of Muslims support Islamic terrorism and the Islamification of the UK. The Right also recognises that the Left-wing support for Islam is rather bizarre, considering it's a religion whose adherents have beliefs which are the opposite of the Left's beliefs - whether on gay rights and women's rights. Why are the Left so in support of a religion which, had it been any other religion or group or organisation with such beliefs, the Left would call it "Far-right"?
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,933
1,910
113
RICHARD LITTLEJOHN: The Donald Trump protests in London were reasonably good-natured, but as always with the modern, agitprop Left it ain't over till the fat lady shouts 'Nazi'

By Richard Littlejohn for the Daily Mail
7 June 2019

Take a gander at this photograph of a porky protester screeching 'Nazi scum!' at a Donald Trump supporter in London this week.

It's uncanny how much she looks like the Baby Trump blimp being flown at the same demonstration.

This priceless resemblance was spotted by a wag on an internet forum called ARRSE, which is an abbreviation of the Army Rumour Service, popular with those interested in military matters.


At the demo, she sported a bottle blonde hairdo. On her Twitter profile, her hair is purple, she's got glitter glued to her cheeks and she's posing in the middle of a circle of EU stars

Laugh? I almost spilled my milkshake. The woman in question answers to the name of Siobhan Prigent, although her friends on Twitter know her as @SiobhanGrrArgh.

She describes herself as an 'Intersectional Feminist, LGBT+, accused crazy cat lady, body positive, striving for equality. Trying to educate myself daily. TERFS & SWERFS not welcome.'

Intersectional Feminist? Sorry, can't help, I'm afraid. Accused crazy cat lady? Pass. Body positive? Judge for yourself, but I imagine it involves finding excuses for being fat.

TERFS & SWERFS? Now then, I have heard of TERFS, although I'm not sure what it stands for.

They're women who get into fights with 'trans' folk because they insist, somewhat controversially, that people born with penises shouldn't be allowed to describe themselves as female, or use women's toilets, changing rooms and swimming pools.


Video on MailOnline shows her yelling 'Nazi scum!' into the face of a semi-retired grandfather in a Make America Great Again hat, then laughing as he is splattered with milkshake, while a woman police officer looks on


But SWERFS? Your guess is as good as mine. Maybe they're lady Smurfs. Where are they all coming from?

Trump's detractors laugh at his idiosyncratic hairstyle and orange complexion. So what are we to make of @Siobhan GrrArgh's appearance?

At the demo, she sported a bottle blonde hairdo. On her Twitter profile, her hair is purple, she's got glitter glued to her cheeks and she's posing in the middle of a circle of EU stars.

Yesterday's Mail featured another picture of her with green hair, some kind of star inked onto her face and what looks like an engagement ring through her nose.

Apparently, she also has a tattoo of Groot, a tree-like superhero from the Marvel comics, on her arm. Of course she does.

So I wasn't surprised to learn that, by her own admission, she's had 'Borderline Personality Disorder' in the past.

In the normal course of events, we'd never have heard of @SiobhanGrrArgh. She only came to our attention after she joined the anti-Trump rally at Westminster.

Video on MailOnline shows her yelling 'Nazi scum!' into the face of a semi-retired grandfather in a Make America Great Again hat, then laughing as he is splattered with milkshake, while a woman police officer looks on.

Elsewhere in the crowd, another grey-haired Trump supporter was attacked and knocked to the ground by the self-righteous mob.


People with proper, productive jobs can't afford to take time off work to throw milkshakes and wave banners in the middle of the afternoon. It turns out that @Siobhan GrrArgh does have a job. And this is where it gets even better. A stock image of the protest is pictured above


If the man in the MAGA hat hadn't been abused and showered with milkshake, we would never have given @SiobhanGrrArgh another thought.

But her overt aggression and contempt for anyone with a different worldview typifies the modern, agitprop Left. It's not enough to agree to disagree, they have to demonise their opponents, to portray them as evil.

The pro-Trump grandad said the event had been reasonably good-natured until she started accusing him of being a Nazi.

It was an unfortunate slur, to say the least, given that Trump's visit was to mark the 75th anniversary of D-Day, to pay tribute to the tens of thousands of brave young men who gave their lives fighting real Nazis. Yet it's the one offensive N-word the Left is happy to throw around, when they're not labelling anyone who disagrees with them as a 'fascist'.

As the Mail said yesterday, haven't any of these morons ever read a history book?

This kind of behaviour might be understandable, if not forgivable, in an over-excited teenager. But @SiobhanGrrArgh is 34 years old, for heaven's sake, an age at which she really should have grown up.

What is striking is how many of the demonstrators were not in the first flush of youth.

The bloke standing next to @SiobhanGrrArgh, shouting at the pro-Trump grandad, has a grey beard and is wearing a cloth cap. A pound to a penny, most of them work in the public sector, or were on official trades union duties. That's if they're not on the dole.

People with proper, productive jobs can't afford to take time off work to throw milkshakes and wave banners in the middle of the afternoon.

It turns out that @Siobhan GrrArgh does have a job. And this is where it gets even better. She runs a private company which provides 'clinical services' to the NHS. Yet here she was on a demonstration against, among other things, a free trade deal with the U.S., which opponents claim will lead to the privatisation of the health service.

You couldn't make it up. Still, self-awareness is not one of the Left's more obvious traits.

If ITV ever decide to make a sequel to Love Island, they should invite @SiobhanGrrArgh to take part. She could go round hollering 'Nazi scum!' at the other contestants until she was voted off.

They could call it Hate Island.

Until then, @Siobhan GrrArgh has gone to the top of the leaderboard in this year's Here We Go Looby Loo Awards. It will take an extra-special madwoman to pip her to the title. The bookies have already stopped taking bets.

To be fair, she has had the decency to apologise belatedly for her behaviour and has closed all her social media accounts.

No such apology has been received from the star of the show, the Labour leader O.J. Corbyn, who chose to address the demo, after turning down an invitation to the state banquet.

The man who would be Prime Minister preferred the company of the rabble flinging milkshakes, screaming 'Nazi scum!' and attacking middle-aged Trump supporters, to dining with the Queen and the President of our closest ally.

Like @SiobhanGrrArgh, Corbyn has never grown up. And he's twice her age. He's an unreconstructed student agitator, utterly unfit for the highest office.

At least she admits to having had a personality disorder. What's Corbyn's excuse?



The new politics didn't last long, did it?

Funniest story of the week was the split in Change UK, a party that was only set up a few months ago.

Six of its 11 MPs have left to sit as independents, leaving just Soubry Loo and a quartet of other sad losers.

Apparently, there was a clash of egos, they couldn't agree on who should be leader and it turns out there wasn't much appetite among voters for a bunch of reheated, EU-mad self-publicists after all.

So no change there, then.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-7114303/RICHARD-LITTLEJOHN-aint-till-fat-lady-shouts-Nazi.html
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,933
1,910
113
Donald Trump meets Queen at start of UK state visit

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-48491722?ocid=global_bbccom_email_03062019_top+news+stories

.....and he just HAD to start this trip with a nasty tweet about/to Mayor of London.

It isn’t Trump who’s a big baby – it’s Sadiq

Sadiq Khan’s insults against Trump were historically illiterate and dangerously coarse.




Brendan O'Neill
Editor
Spiked
4th June 2019



If you want to see just how entitled and arrogant Britain’s chattering classes have become, look no further than their indignation over Donald Trump’s tweets calling London mayor Sadiq Khan a ‘stone cold loser’ and mocking his diminutive stature. Trump posted his Sadiqphobic tweets (I’m amazed the PC set hasn’t started using the word ‘Sadiqphobia’ yet) as Air Force One was readying to land in London.

The tweets were an outrage against morality, decency, diplomacy and the United Kingdom itself, the hissy-fit-havers insist. ‘How dare Trump attack the lovely, progressive Sadiq?’, they cry in unison, as they accuse the orange oaf they love to loathe of demeaning the office of the president, weakening the special relationship, and coarsening public discourse.

There’s only one problem with their self-satisfied flapping over Trump’s online namecalling – Sadiq started it! He was the first name-caller in this ridiculous, teenage Twitterspat. He likened Trump to fascists. In a national newspaper. On Sunday, the day before Trump came to the UK. Sadiq’s crystal-clear intention was to cause a diplomatic stink and start a virtual scrap that might win him some brownie points in the interminable battle over who will get to animate the corpse of the Labour Party once Jeremy Corbyn vacates this macabre office. And anyone who has ever braved a rowdy playground, had a lively night out or even just had a normal job will know that you can’t go around dishing out insults without getting a bit of blowback. Where the hell did these people grow up?

The UK media depicts Trump as a big baby. (When they’re not depicting him as literally Hitler, that is. How telling that they can’t decide if he’s an overgrown child or the reincarnation of the most evil man in human history.) That Trump baby blimp will fly over London today, as part of the anti-Trump protests, with the official blessing of Sadiq Khan, of course. But in this spat, it isn’t Trump who’s behaving like a baby – it’s Sadiq.

Sadiq has done the equivalent of starting a playground scrap and then running to teacher to say ‘Miss, he called me a name!’ when the person he picked a scrap with fired insults back at him. It’s pathetic. What Sadiq said about Trump in the Observer – that his actions are like those of the ‘European dictators of the 1930s and 40s’ and that he is the figurehead of a ‘global far-right movement’ that is ‘using the same divisive tropes of the fascists of the 20th century’ – is far worse than what Trump said about Sadiq in return. Sadiq likened Trump to the people who destroyed Europe and murdered and gassed to death millions of Jews; Trump called Sadiq a midget. I’m saying Sadiq got off very lightly here.

It is testament to the utter devaluation of the word ‘fascist’, to the way it has been reduced to a meaningless everyday insult, that the Twitterati and media elite were fine with Sadiq calling Trump a fascist but then completely lost the plot when Trump said Sadiq is a loser who is not very tall. This is one of the key problems with the Trump-bashing of the political, media and middle classes – the way it has appropriated the horrors and the language of history in order to add some oomph to these people’s disdain for Trump. Because in the process of plundering the barbarism of the 1930s and 1940s for words and imagery to use against a 21st-century president they don’t like, these people demean history itself and relativise what happened in those darkest moments in human history.

They think they are getting one over on Trump, but in truth they are getting one over on the victims of fascism and on the importance of recognising the unique nature of the Nazis’ industrial destruction of European Jewry. In constantly citing the 1930s in their spluttering attacks on Trump, they render that decade mundane, routine, just a ‘bad patch’ in human history, like the bad patch we are allegedly experiencing today under Trump and other populist leaders. They unwittingly contribute to a sense that maybe 1930s Europe wasn’t that bad. In comparing fascist Europe to Trump’s America, they don’t so much insult Trump’s America as they do soften and even excuse the staggering, unprecedented crisis of humanity that occurred in the 1930s and 1940s in Europe.

The terrible irony is that they themselves contribute to a culture of prejudice. Holocaust relativism – the idea that Jewish suffering wasn’t all that bad so maybe we should stop going on about it – is one of the key drivers of the new, identitarian breed of anti-Semitism. In inflaming Holocaust relativism, these people certainly do nothing to challenge the new anti-Semitism, and they may even be accidentally energising it. Their overuse of the words fascism and Nazi and Hitler and genocide is not only historically illiterate – it is politically dangerous. Sadiq’s words have done far more to coarsen politics and society than Trump’s response did.

Brendan O’Neill is editor of spiked and host of the spiked podcast, The Brendan O’Neill Show. Subscribe to the podcast here. And find Brendan on Instagram: @burntoakboy

https://www.spiked-online.com/2019/06/04/it-isnt-trump-whos-a-big-baby-its-sadiq/
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,933
1,910
113
Why Ceausescu's 1978 state visit was far more humiliating than Trump’s ever could be

Buckingham Palace was advised to remove silver brushes from the dressing table so the guests didn't steal them

Robert Hardman


The Queen with Romanian president Nicolae Ceausescu during his visit

The Spectator
1 June 2019

The Queen has seldom had more holes in a state banquet seating plan. The leader of the opposition, the shadow foreign secretary, the Speaker and the leader of the Liberal Democrats have all ostentatiously refused ‘Her Majesty’s command’ to attend her banquet in honour of Donald Trump next week. The fact that the dinner is in honour of our greatest ally — and in the week we celebrate D-Day — seems to matter less than virtue points on social media.

Few will appreciate the irony of this petty posturing more than the Queen herself. For it is that same tranche of the liberal elite who remain responsible for the worst state visit of her reign.

It was a Labour prime minister, Harold Wilson, who invited the brutal Romanian despot Nicolae Ceausescu and his equally ghastly wife, Elena, to pay a state visit to Buckingham Palace in June 1978. By the time they arrived, Wilson had been replaced by Jim Callaghan, who was just as enthusiastic, as was the leader of the Liberal party. David Steel even presented the dictator with a labrador puppy called Gladstone (later renamed Corbu and promoted to honorary colonel in the Romanian Army).

None cheered louder than the one paper granted an exclusive interview with Ceausescu ahead of the visit.

‘Mr Ceausescu,’ gushed the Guardian’s Hella Pick, ‘has shown immense courage in asserting Romania’s independence from the Russians and encouraging Romania’s nationalism’.

That same nationalism lay behind the ruthless persecution of millions of ethnic Hungarians, not that this was of any great concern to the left, let alone to ministers. Their sole concern was a £300 million deal for British airliners.

Ceausescu was a communist with an eye for commerce. Exploring previously classified Foreign Office files for my book Queen of the World, I found that the Foreign Office was inundated with requests for introductions. British Aerospace even offered to send Ceausescu home by Concorde. A pecking order was established. The chairmen of Shell and ICI plus the director-general of the BBC would be invited to the Queen’s state banquet, whereas ITN’s head of current affairs would have to make do with the PM’s lunch the next day.


Ceausescu with Prime Minister James Callaghan outside 10 Downing Street in 1978


There was one big hurdle, however. A nervous memo from the British Embassy in Bucharest warned that the Romanians had ‘dropped a number of strong hints that Mrs Ceausescu would be pleased to receive some kind of academic distinction’. Her scientific credentials were bogus but the visit could be in jeopardy if she didn’t get something. The Foreign Office asked Harold Wilson to lean on the University of Bradford, since he was its chancellor. He failed. No joy at Heriot-Watt, Sussex, Liverpool or Southampton either. Imperial College refused, although a Ceausescu son had studied there. By now, Kenneth Scott, head of the FCO’s Eastern European department, feared a leak ‘that the FCO are hawking Madame Ceausescu’s somewhat dubious wares around’.

With just a month to go, the Polytechnic of Central London came to the rescue with an honorary professorship while the Royal Institute of Chemistry produced a fellowship. Panic over.

The Foreign Office — and the Palace — were under no illusions about Ceausescu’s nastiness. ‘He is as absolute a dictator as could be found in the world today,’ the British ambassador to Romania, Reggie Secondé, wrote in a profile for his bosses. Elena Ceausescu was a ‘viper’ who ‘likes shopping’, their children were ‘feckless’. There had been ‘disastrous’ scenes on Ceausescu’s recent visit to Belgium, where his guards had ‘scrambled for places at the dinner table’. On a tour of the US, they had demanded free fur coats. On the plus side, Ceausescu was ‘well disposed towards Britain’. There was one golden rule: ‘Constant praise for Ceausescu’s international statesmanship is very much in order.’

With just days to go, the foreign secretary, David Owen, was having serious doubts. ‘Who agreed to this visit?’ he wrote on an internal memo to his private secretary, Ewen Fergusson. ‘Did I? If I did, I regret it.’

The Queen also received a call from president Giscard d’Estaing of France. He warned her that, during a recent stay in Paris, the Ceausescus had looted their quarters and had even hacked holes in the walls looking for bugging devices. The Queen passed it all on. ‘They were advised to move the silver brushes from the Palace dressing table or the Romanians would pinch the lot,’ former cabinet secretary Lord (Robin) Butler recalls.

In fact, Ceausescu was on his best behaviour for the Queen. ‘He did exactly what he was told to do,’ says Sir Roger Du Boulay, former vice-marshal of the Diplomatic Corps. The Royal Family produced the full works — carriages to the Palace, tea with the Queen Mother, gifts (a hunting rifle and the Order of the Bath for him; a gold brooch for her). The state banquet was an odd affair with the British in white tie and the Romanians in lounge suits. With nothing in common between the two heads of state, the speeches were as underwhelming as the wine — plonk by royal standards. Yet the Romanian press presented the visit as a landmark in modern history, as did Central London Poly. Elena Ceausescu arrived to hear Professor Terence Burlin, senior pro-rector, hail her as ‘a woman of discernment’ and ‘a fine example of Heisenberg’s epigram: “Science clears the field on which technology can build” ’.

The Queen had already had enough of her visitors. While out walking her dogs in the garden, she spotted the Ceausescus coming the other way and actually hid behind a bush to avoid them.

Nothing, however, was to jeopardise the £300 million plane contract. When Romanian dissidents staged a wholly peaceful demonstration outside one venue, the police parked a coach in front of them and arrested their leader, Ion Ratiu.

Finally, Callaghan got his deal. It was all in vain, of course. A mere nine BAC 1-11 aircraft had been built by the time the Ceausescus were put up against a wall and shot 11 years later.

To this day, their state visit remains a low point in British diplomacy. When I asked David Owen why there is no mention of it in his memoirs, he was commendably frank: ‘I try to pretend it never happened.’

The Queen, however, has never forgotten the guest she calls ‘that frightful little man’.

It makes it all the more risible to hear politicians like Sir Vince Cable claiming that Donald Trump’s state visit will somehow ‘embarrass the Queen’. It will do nothing of the sort. For real embarrassment, rewind to 1978. Sir Vince might at least have the decency to apologise, on behalf of his party, for Colonel Corbu, the labrador pup.

Robert Hardman is the author of Queen of the World (now in Arrow paperback) and writes for the Daily Mail.

https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/06...r-more-humiliating-than-trumps-ever-could-be/
 
Last edited:

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
Correct. It was the British who contributed most. Most ships. Most planes. Most amphibious vehicles. Sea operation was British-led. Land operation was British-led. Air operation was British-led. The operation was planned by the British.




NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Sorry Leafless.................................................


Britain was BANKRUPT by early 1941!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Churchill flew to Washington and told Roosevelt that Britian had come to some HARD CHOICES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Brits had fought Nazis to a stand still....................................


But - as mentioned - Britain was BANKRUPT and could not buy the resources they needed to continue the fight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Britain COULD sue for peace...............................................


and COULD come to a negotiated settlement with Hitler!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Hitler actually WANTED a negotiated peace with Britain- one reason why Hitler never invaded!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



That "peace" would have left Europe ENTIRELY in Nazi hands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


OR.....................................................


Britain WOULD CONTINUE TO FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


USING RESOURCES SUPPLIED BY YANKEES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


AS an added inducement........................................


Churchill pointed out...................................


that once Britain was out of the war...........................................


then the YANKEES would have to face BOTH Nazi Germany AND Imperial Japan...........................................


ALL ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Lend lease came from that rather nasty conversation!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



A WHOLE LOT of Yankees Isolationists were prepared to defend democracy.......................................


to the last BRIT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


However it IS A FACT that THROUGHOUT the war..............................................


British strategy and long term military and political goals .............................................


Were ALWAYS superior to what Yankees had on offer!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


British Brains..................................................


and Yankee resources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Nobody seems to read the old Cornelius Ryan book "The Longest Day"................................


the most detailed and VALID account of the Normandy invasion!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Ryan had the PRICELESS ADVANTAGE of being able to interview senior leaders on both sides............................



since MOST OF THEM were still alive in 1950!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Anybody writing in morfe recent years is simply REHASHING Ryan`s work!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



That Yankee general........................................


some guy named Eisenhower said it best........................................................


in his memoirs he commented that "if the other armies had suffered as the Americans had done, then the invasion would have been



driven back into the sea"!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Yankee planners BOTCHED the Normandy invasion in MULTIPLE WAYS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


And then had to rely on Montgomery TO PROP THEM UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
49,933
1,910
113
NOT TRUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Sorry Leafless.................................................
Britain was BANKRUPT by early 1941!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Churchill flew to Washington and told Roosevelt that Britian had come to some HARD CHOICES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Brits had fought Nazis to a stand still....................................
But - as mentioned - Britain was BANKRUPT and could not buy the resources they needed to continue the fight!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Britain COULD sue for peace...............................................
and COULD come to a negotiated settlement with Hitler!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hitler actually WANTED a negotiated peace with Britain- one reason why Hitler never invaded!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That "peace" would have left Europe ENTIRELY in Nazi hands!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OR.....................................................
Britain WOULD CONTINUE TO FIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
USING RESOURCES SUPPLIED BY YANKEES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


It's funny how some people are so ignorant of Britain when it comes to WWII.

Britain may have been "bankrupt" in 1941 but this in no way affected her status as an industrial superpower.

British plane production increased as the war went on - and outstripped Germany throughout almost all of the conflict. Britain produced 15,049 aircraft in 1940 compared to Germany's 10,862; she produced 23,672 planes in 1942 compared to Germany's 15,409. In total, Britain produced 131,549 planes during the war, compared to Germany's 119,907.

The US did give the British and Canadians 50 Clemson, Wickes and Caldwell destroyers, but which weren't used on D-Day.

Of the seven battleships that took part in D-Day, four were British.

Of the 20 light cruisers, 17 were British.

Of the 139 destroyers, 85 were British.

Of the remaining 508 warships, 352 were British.

On D-Day over 11,590 Allied aircraft of all types were involved, 5,656 of these being Royal Air Force.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,863
2,737
113
New Brunswick
The reason why they haven't been attacked is because they have far less Muslims and haven't adopted the disastrous left-wing policy of multiculturalism.


Muslim does NOT automatically mean terrorist, you dipstick.


And lack of a multiculturalism society doesn't mean that they're less open to terrorism, it just makes the terrorism likely to be more internal than external.
 

Serryah

Hall of Fame Member
Dec 3, 2008
10,863
2,737
113
New Brunswick
Is it hateful speech that the Left tries to supress? Not in my opinion. They try to supress all sorts of speech that they disagree witth, whether hateful or not. Brexiteers campaigning to leave the EU; people campaigning to cut immigration and implement immigration controls once outside the EU; people who are opposed to gay marriage. These are all people whose legitimate views are often being supressed by mobs of intolerant Lefties. This is fascism.

It seems to me that the Left are the ones conducting most of the suppression and violence and intimidation against opposing groups. It isn't the Right who are suppressing and "no-platforming" opposing views in colleges and universities, where free speech, dissenting views and debate between people with opposing views should be encouraged. All these perpetrators are the Left. It's fascism. No free speech. No opposing views. The banning of people speaking with opposing views to the Left. Fascism.

I don't remember a systematic campaign in the United States to try and overturn the election of Obama. I doubt there would have been a systematic campaign in the UK to try and overturn a Remain win in the referendum. Again, it's the Left trying to overturn democracy when the people had the audacity to go for their opponents. It's fascism. Perpetrated by the Left.

Fascist states are generally anti-religion.

I think the Right generally has a more commonsense attitude towards Islam than the Left does. The Right recognises that, according to polls conducted in the UK, a significant number of Muslims support Islamic terrorism and the Islamification of the UK. The Right also recognises that the Left-wing support for Islam is rather bizarre, considering it's a religion whose adherents have beliefs which are the opposite of the Left's beliefs - whether on gay rights and women's rights. Why are the Left so in support of a religion which, had it been any other religion or group or organisation with such beliefs, the Left would call it "Far-right"?




We could do the 'opinion dance' forever.


Facts please.
 

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
It's funny how some people are so ignorant of Britain when it comes to WWII.

Britain may have been "bankrupt" in 1941 but this in no way affected her status as an industrial superpower.

British plane production increased as the war went on - and outstripped Germany throughout almost all of the conflict. Britain produced 15,049 aircraft in 1940 compared to Germany's 10,862; she produced 23,672 planes in 1942 compared to Germany's 15,409. In total, Britain produced 131,549 planes during the war, compared to Germany's 119,907.

The US did give the British and Canadians 50 Clemson, Wickes and Caldwell destroyers, but which weren't used on D-Day.

Of the seven battleships that took part in D-Day, four were British.

Of the 20 light cruisers, 17 were British.

Of the 139 destroyers, 85 were British.

Of the remaining 508 warships, 352 were British.

On D-Day over 11,590 Allied aircraft of all types were involved, 5,656 of these being Royal Air Force.






Poor stupid Black leafless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


He cleverly quotes various MEANINGLESS NUMBERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



I mean no disrespect to Britain when I say THEY WERE BANKRUPT by 1941!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


In his book The Grand Alliance..............................................................


CHURCHILL HIMSELF WRITES.............................................................


that he told Roosevelt that Yankees HAD A CHOICE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Bankroll Britain to continue the fight.........................................


or watch Britain MAKE A NEGOTIATED PEACE with Nazi Germany....................................


which would leave Yankee to FACE Nazi Germany AND Imperial Japan ALONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


There is NO QUESTION that Britain RAN its economy FLAT OUT........................................


AND FULL ON throughout the entire war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


The FACT REMAINS......................................


BRITAIN COULD NOT have fought after 1941..............................................


without Yankee resources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Especially FOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Britain IMPORTED HALF of its ENTIRE food supply at the best of times............................................


and the war took a LOT of people out of food production!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


No Yankee food would mean NO BRIT war!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



But from 1941 on...........................................


they ate a LOT of Yankee food....................................


and used a fair bit of Yankee fuel......................................


and steel.....................................


and chemicals for making ammunition and etc.................................................


Yankees supplied a LOT OF Vehicles.................................


The pivotal Operation Pedestal convoy that allowed Malta to survive..........................................


had the Yankee tanker Ohio at its heart....................................


the Brits HAD NO FAST MODERN TANKERS LEFT....................................


so they Borrowed Ohio from the Yankees..........................


and crewed Ohio with volunteers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Because Ohio was loaded with 30,000 gallons of aviation gas.....................................


the most volatile stuff made to that point in the world.............................


the ship was a floating bomb...........................................


and somehow survived two bomb hits.............................


and got to Malta......................................


dragged there by two Brit destroyers TIED on either side to the BOMB........................................


And at Alamein the 8th army withstood the Nazi attack.................................


and got RESUPPLIED with YANKEE General Sherman tanks.......................................


that WERE SUPERIOR to BRIT tanks because the Sherman`s could fire explosive shells to more effectively take out German anti



tank weapons.........................................................


than the Brit tanks that could only fire armour piercing shot- useful against other tanks ..........................................


but USELESS against anti tank guns!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


THE TEAM working again....................



each one has its strengths and its weaknesses!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



And Rommel waited for desperately needed FUEL supplies that never came.........................


because torpedo planes from Malta used the fuel delivered by Ohio.............................


to SINK the last available Nazi tanker!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


While Yankees shipped in those Shermans!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



So anybody with a BRAIN........................................


CAN SEE THE TEAM WORK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



Brit BRAINS and Yankee resources!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
8
36
The US did give the British and Canadians 50 Clemson, Wickes and Caldwell destroyers, but which weren't used on D-Day.

A word about those 50 American destroyers (of which the RCN got seven). They were practically useless ... obsolete, really terrible sea carrying ... narrow, the wrong waterline length for the period of North Atlantic waves were so old that the rivets in the fuel bunkers rattled around loose in the steel, leaking sea water into the fuel oil during every trip. It is a big deal having to tie up and empty fuel tanks when the convoy system required your ships to turn around and sail the other direction almost immediately. They were often hard pressed to take on food stores between trips and purging useless fuel oil was not on.

One of ours was beached as a wreck in Iceland. One, HMCS St. Croix was sunk by a German torpedo with heavy loss of life and the other five were put out to pasture as training hulks in the Bay of Fundy. They contributed very little to the Battle if the Atlantic and the Royal Navy experience was not much better. They couldn't use them, they were so bad.

The only good story told about them is that when they were transferred over to the Canadians from the US (Brooklyn Navy Yard?) they were jammed to the deck heads with vital supplies of every kind ... food, medicine, spares, kitchen sink. You know that the decision to do that must have been made lower down in the ranks and with the help of a lot of enlisted men, too. None of it was "Lend Lease". It was help from a friendly neighbour. God bless him, whoever did that.

p.s. It was not a picnic.

http://www.naval-museum.mb.ca/battle_atlantic/st.croix/tragic-saga.htm
 
Last edited:

spilledthebeer

Executive Branch Member
Jan 26, 2017
9,296
4
36
The US did give the British and Canadians 50 Clemson, Wickes and Caldwell destroyers, but which weren't used on D-Day.

A word about those 50 American destroyers (of which the RCN got seven). They were practically useless ... obsolete, really terrible sea carrying ... narrow, the wrong waterline length for the period of North Atlantic waves were so old that the rivets in the fuel bunkers rattled around loose in the steel, leaking sea water into the fuel oil during every trip. It is a big deal having to tie up and empty fuel tanks when the convoy system required your ships to turn around and sail the other direction almost immediately. They were often hard pressed to take on food stores between trips and purging useless fuel oil was not on.

One of ours was beached as a wreck in Iceland. One, HMCS St. Croix was sunk by a German torpedo with heavy loss of life and the other five were put out to pasture as training hulks in the Bay of Fundy. They contributed very little to the Battle if the Atlantic and the Royal Navy experience was not much better. They couldn't use them, they were so bad.

The only good story told about them is that when they were transferred over to the Canadians from the US (Brooklyn Navy Yard?) they were jammed to the deck heads with vital supplies of every kind ... food, medicine, spares, kitchen sink. You know that the decision to do that must have been made lower down in the ranks and with the help of a lot of enlisted men, too. None of it was "Lend Lease". It was help from a friendly neighbour. God bless him, whoever did that.

p.s. It was not a picnic.

http://www.naval-museum.mb.ca/battle_atlantic/st.croix/tragic-saga.htm






Oh Comrade Curious.................................


you might want to go read some of the old history books.................................


such as "The Grand Alliance" by Churchill !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


For whatever reason..................................


the Yankee navy was MUCH MORE Supportive of the Brit cause than many other Yankees!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Yankee destroyers went so far as to FOLLOW Nazi U-boats...


and report their position to the Brits.......................


prior to Pearl Harbour!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!